We're taking a whole new approach.

Start reading The Daily Wire WITHOUT ADS*

Try it FREE for 30 Days!

E-mail *

By checking this box, I have read and agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy and authorize Forward Publishing LLC to charge my card today for the subscription fee and in the future for renewal fees. *

Kangaroo courts, propaganda surrounding so-called campus "rape culture," and feminists' insistence on redefining "consent" have coalesced to create a campus fraught with fear, confusion, victimization, and due process violations. This story about the aftermath of a male and female college students' drunken hookup puts a spotlight on such chaos.

An unnamed female student was recently suspended from the University of Cincinnati after she and an unnamed male student engaged in sexual activity on September 30, 2017 back at his dorm while they were both intoxicated. Both students admitted to the sexual activity, which included the male touching the female, and also admitted to being intoxicated. But here's why only the female student was apparently suspended: the male student beat her to the punch in filing a Title IX complaint. (Title IX is intended to protect students from gender discrimination.)

Two days after the drunken hookup, the male student filed a sexual misconduct complaint at the Title IX office, alleging that the sexual activity occurred when he was intoxicated and thus unable to give consent. On the same day the complaint was filed, the female student was officially under investigation from the school. It was eventually determined at a school hearing that she was guilty of the sexual misconduct and suspended; her attempt at an appeal was also denied.

Of course, the female student says she was drunk, too, which begs the question: by such a standard, wasn't she also unable to give consent and thus a victim of sexual misconduct herself?

Muddying the waters further, the female student previously reported a friend of the male student in question for sexual misconduct after she allegedly engaged in sexual activity with him while intoxicated. It's possible the male student was preemptively filing the complaint against the female student in this instance out of fear of being victimized for their consensual sex, or, as the female student suggests, he filed the complaint as an act of revenge on behalf of his accused friend.

Are the horrors of campus sex standards starting to set in, yet?

Now the female student, named as "Jane Roe," is suing the University of Cincinnati for violating her due process in a lawsuit that claims the male student, named "John Doe," was acting out of revenge when he filed the complaint against her.

"On information and belief, John Doe was motivated to file a Title IX Complaint in retaliation for a prior Title X Complaint Jane Roe had filed against his friend," says the suit.

Robby Soave, a reporter at Reason familiar with campus legal affairs, floats a theory of fear in his piece on the incident: "Doe woke up, realized they had engaged in sexual activity while they were both drunk, and feared that she would file a complaint against him, as she had done to his friend. Panic-stricken, he felt he had no choice but to beat her to the punch." (Note: Soave also acknowledges that Roe's revenge claims could also be true.)

Whatever happened between the two students, one things is clear: the rules and standards for sex and alleged sexual misconduct on campus are anything but clear.